You are here

Man demands money at Dot. Ave. liquor store, gets a beating instead

Boston Police report arresting a man they say got away mainly with bruises and cuts from a beatdown supplied by workers at the Welles Liquor Mart after they thought better of just handing him the money he demanded.

According to police, Sean Brown, 38, walked into the 1772 Dot. Ave. store around 8:30 p.m. yesterday, said he had a gun and demanded money:

According to store employees, after giving the suspect an undisclosed amount of money, an altercation between the suspect and two store employees ensued. The altercation spilled out to the sidewalk and ended when the suspect fled on foot towards Lonsdale Street. During the altercation, the store employees state that the suspect was struck several times.

WBZ reports one of the workers whacked Brown in the head several times with a liquor bottle.

Police say officers initially couldn't find Brown. Around 11:15 p.m., however, officers responded to a call for an injured person at Florida and Mallet streets a couple blocks away:

On arrival, officers observed a black male, not suitably dressed for the elements, suffering from what appeared to be lacerations and bruises to his head area.

The guy, who turned out to match the description of the attempted-robbery suspect, was taken to Boston Medical Center with non-life-threatening injuries - and a police escort. He was charged with armed robbery.

I agree anon, rather than a non-lethal beatdown, it would have been better if a gun (or two!) had been discharged, perhaps several times, among a group comprised mostly of innocent people, in a crowded city neighborhood.

I mean, if the alleged robber wasn't killed, at least there would have been a chance someone else could have been injured or killed. What a wasted opportunity to take another human's life!

But what will happen next time? if the guy has a gun, and the employees fail in an attempted unarmed beatdown? not a good outcome for the employees, and likely success for the bad guy. not enough time for the cops to get there in time to prevent anything...

who would object to the arming of the employees, which (as word gets around) amounts to a great deterrent?

Boston-sized cities in states with more liberal gun laws and higher rates of private gun ownership generally do not have lower levels of theft, assault, or gun fatalities.

Hmmm, how weird. It's almost like having more guns around means that more people (both the guilty and the good) get shot.

If one's local bad guys are assuming that all store clerks will have guns, perhaps it means they'll make sure to have guns too, and they'll be inclined to use them before they can themselves be shot. Immediate DefCon1 for $120 in the register and some swiped cigarettes - awesome!

(Note, I'm not the previous commenter, have no idea whether what they are claiming is true or not, just a data scientist that regularly uses the FBI data for other research and knows that data supporting or refuting these types of claims could easily be found there)

Jeff didn't feel up to providing evidence for his post, or may simply be too busy to. Who knows? In any case, if someone is going to make a statement such as his, it needs data to back it up. If he has specific cities to point out, I'd be interested in reading their laws.